IPPT20120209, CJEU, Luksan v van der Let

Print this page 08-04-2012
IPPT20120209, CJEU, Luksan v van der Let

COPYRIGHT

 

Rights to exploit a cinematographic work must by operation of law be vested in the principal director
• In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the first question referred is that Articles 1 and 2 of Directive 93/83, and Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29 in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2006/115 and with Article 2 of Directive 2006/116, must be interpreted as meaning that rights to exploit a cinematographic work such as those at issue in the main proceedings (reproduction right, satellite broadcasting right and any other right of communication to the public through the making available to the public) vest by operation of law, directly and originally, in the principal director.
• Consequently, those provisions must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which allocates those exploitation rights by operation of law exclusively to the producer of the work in question.

 

Rebuttable presumption of transfer of rights to exploit the cinematographic work allowed
• Having regard to the foregoing considerations, the answer to Question 2(a) is that European Union law must be interpreted as allowing the Member States the option of laying down a presumption of transfer, in favour of the producer of a cinematographic work, of rights to exploit the cinematographic work such as those at issue in the main proceedings (satellite broadcasting right, reproduction right and any other right of communication to the public through the making available to the public), provided that such a presumption is not an irrebuttable one precluding the principal director of that work from agreeing otherwise.

 

Principal director must be directly entitled to the right to fair compensation for private copying
• Having regard to the foregoing considerations, the answer to Question 2(b) is that European Union law must be interpreted as meaning that, in his capacity as author of a cinematographic work, the principal director thereof must be entitled, by operation of law, directly and originally, to the right to the fair compensation provided for in Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29 under the ‘private copying’ exception.

 

Presumption of transfer of right to fair compensation for private copying not allowed
• that European Union law must be interpreted as not allowing the Member States the option of laying down a presumption of transfer, in favour of the producer of a cinematographic work, of the right to fair compensation vesting in the principal director of that work, whether that presumption is couched in irrebuttable terms or may be departed from.


IPPT20120209, CJEU, Luksan v van der Let